On Rights

I know I've said this before, but I am a big fan of negative rights. Basically, stuff the government cannot do to me. It can't censor my speech. It can't take away my guns. It can't put me in double jeopardy. No ex post facto laws. No cruel and unusual punishment. It can't force me to join a favored religion. You get the idea.

I am less sanguine about positive rights. The right to be provided health care, education, social security, etc.

Negative rights can exist without a government to provide them. Arguably a government helps to ensure that those negative rights are respected by other members of society. However, in the absence of a government how is one guaranteed that their right to be provided health care will be respected? I would feel much more comfortable with a set of responsibilities that each individual or family has toward their children, society, and others that replicated these positive rights. I think the word right is tossed around too easily.